Allowed

Shakir v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC30 May 2023CRLA/1079/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the Special Judge's order rejecting bail and allowed the criminal appeal. The court held that the appellant must be released on bail due to procedural flaws, overcrowding, and the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, despite the serious allegations.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail via personal bond and two sureties; impugned order of bail rejection set aside.

Shakir Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:120563

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1079 of 2022

¶4

Appellant :- Shakir Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant; learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 16.01.2021, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST(P.A)Act / Additional Sessions Judge, Budaun has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Special Sessions Trial No.1322 of 2019, Case Crime No. 637 of 2018, under Sections 376, 366 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Bilsi, District Budaun.

¶8

There is allegation against the appellant of abduction of a girl belonging to schedule caste with intent to marry and commission of offence of rape.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the victim was consenting party. During investigation, the investigating officer has collected CDR detailsof the mobile phone of the victim and the appellant. It has been found by the investigating officer that much prior of alleged incident victim and appellant were talking on phone. He further submits that it is a case of consent. Victim willingly eloped with the appellant and later falsely implicated him. Appellant is in jail since 19.04.2019. It is a case of malicious prosecutions of appellant under the provisions of SC/ST Act. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature.

¶11

But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the court below has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of the above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 16.01.2021 is, hereby, set aside.

¶13

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let appellant, Shakir, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶15

(i) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

(iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

¶18

(iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶19

(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶20

(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law.

¶22

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶23

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶24

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶25

Order Date :- 30.5.2023 SS

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakir v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakir v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Afsar Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kailashnath Tripathi Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sushil Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Vs State of U.P. and Another